Steam Roster Renumberings

[Coonskin]

Hi All:

I understand the St.L & SF underwent a few renumberings in their steam roster. The one we are most familar with is the 1903 renumbering.

Well, my interest runs in the pre-1903 era, and I'm seeing evidence of a renumber previous to that.

Case in point, original engine #44, a Baldwin 4-6-0 purchased and built in 1879 for the St.L & SF. According to the "Complete Roster" in xls available from this site (I think?), the numbering history for #44 is as follows:

44, 154, then in the 1903 renumber: 404.

My question: When did the renumbering take place between the original number and the 1903 renumber? Does anyone know?

Seeing as my target date is 1888-1890, I'm wondering if the first renumbering had taken place by that time.

Thanks for any input.

Andre

[Karl]

Andre,

I had difficulty locating any direct reference to a renumbering that antedates the 1903 renumbering. However, I think we might be able to derive the date of the first renumbering based on roster data. Using a 1899 roster, the last-built locomotives to possess three numbers were the Baldwin class of 1893 0-6-0's, 3664-3667, nee 1664-1667, nee 9-12. The next group of locomotives purchased by the Frisco were the 349-353, nee 249-253 class, 2-6-0's, which were built by Baldwin during 1894. As noted these locomotives carried but two numbers, so unless there is a fallacy in my logic, can we assume that the first renumbering occurred circa 1893-1894?

During this time frame the Santa Fe, which controlled the Frisco was in bankruptcy, so a renumbering might make some sense as things were undergoing reorganization.

[Coonskin]

Karl:

Thanks for the input.

I too, have been wondering a renumber may be somewhere around 1890+. However, there's a couple of engines in some pics that I can't explain. (Pic attached below.)

In the attached pic, note the engine numbers on the top pic, and the date within the caption. Here's my problem with that pic:

According to the rosters that I have access to, original #50 should be a Rogers 4-6-0 w/56" drivers built in 1880 and purchased by the StL&SF. In this pic, the cab looks similar to an early "Rogers"... but the wheel arrangement looks more like a 4-4-0 than a 4-6-0... and certainly not 56" drivers? Going back to my roster xls, I find there WAS a #50 4-4-0... but only after renumbering. Renumbered #50 was originally #9, a Hinkley 4-4-0 built in 1870, purchased by the StL&SF. That mystery engine seems solved. It is the renumbered Hinkley 4-4-0 #9 purchased by the StL&SF.

Next to the #50, is the #132. Going through the roster xls, I find the only 132 (unless I'm just not finding the correct one) was a Rogers 4-6-0 built in 1885 and purchased by the KCFS&M. ????

A KCFS&M on Frisco property? OR, was that KCFS&M property... which then means a StL&SF engine on KCFS&M property BEFORE the merger. Like I said: ????

In the middle picture, the engine is cut and dried, for the picture matches the roster data: Rogers 4-4-0 Blt 1880 and purchased by the StL&SF.

Now, we get to the bottom engine: #158. Here we go again with more question marks. According to the roster I'm using, this engine was originally built as #48 for the StL&SF (in 1879), exactly as it's captioned. HOWEVER... I'm struggling with the thought that this picture reflects an engine as it would appear in the early 1890's after a least a couple of major shoppings. Seems odd that it still has much old (for the early 1890's) technology on it. (Although it has had the crosshead water pump replaced with injectors.) Maybe it is the early 1890's.

Wow. So much more is known about the late steam era than the early years. There really is a lot to figure out in regards to wanting to reasonably portray the 1888-1890 period. From the sounds of it, engines during "my" era should have their original numbers? (Except for that pic of #158 mentioned above!!)

Seems "learning" something always leads to more questions.

Andre

[Karl]

The Rails West is a great book isn't it?


Top picture:

Number 50, a 4-4-0, is a Hinkley class of 1870: 17x24 cyl; 63" dd; 135 psi; 70800 eng wt; 11400 TE
renumbered to 26
Number 132, a 4-6-0, is a Baldwin class of 1870: 18x24 cyl;55.5" dd; 135 psi; 8325 eng wt; 14000 TE
renumbered 657, then to 2657


Bottom picture:

Number 158, a 4-6-0, is a Baldwin class of 1879: 19x24 cyl; 55.5" dd; 135 psi; 86400 eng wt; 15150 TE
152-159 renumbered to 402-409

[Coonskin]

Hi Karl:

The RW book: Yup!

Hey... where did you get the info on the 132?

Hmmm.

Ah hah!! Found that sucker!! Forgot to check way down the list in the 2600 classes. There it was bigger than Dallas!

I'm now REALLY perplexed as to when that first renumber took place. Those pics containing the renumbered engines certainly look older than the early 1890's. (Given the engine appliances, attire on the persons pictured, etc.)

Say Karl, does Llody Stagner's book have much info/pics on the early era? I don't have that book.

Andre

[Karl]

One last thing... I believe that the caption for the bottom photograph is incorrect, when it states that the original number for 158 was 48. My roster indicates that 158 was the locomotive's original number. That would allow for an earlier photo date, and keep the first renumbering circa 1893-1894.

Stagner's book has a roster which appears to be taken from an 1899 roster, which was compiled during 1964. This is the roster that I am using along with a 1904 diagram book; it has some notations about previous numbers. Stagner's book has a handful of photographs, which would be of interest to you.

[Coonskin]

Hi again Karl!

Thanks for the input on Stagner's book. I have been watching for a hard bound version on Fleebay.

As to the Rails West caption: I read the caption on the scan to originally be the #48 (not 84)? I also found 48/158 on my "Complete SLSF Roster" xls as per captioned. (i.e. #48, #158: Baldwin 1879 Builders #4868.) Am I missing something?


Andre

[Karl]

Hi again Karl!

Thanks for the input on Stagner's book. I have been watching for a hard bound version on Fleebay.

As to the Rails West caption: I read the caption on the scan to originally be the #48 (not 84)? I also found 48/158 on my "Complete SLSF Roster" xls as per captioned. (i.e. #48, #158: Baldwin 1879 Builders #4868.) Am I missing something?


Andre

That is a fat-finger error...should be 48. The 1899 roster does not show 48 as the original number for the 158. Just another wrinkle to iron out, but I think the 1899 roster clears up the problem of the photograph.

[Coonskin]

Oh, I NEVER have "fat fingered syndrome".

erdnA

[Coonskin]

Karl:

I've done a bit more research using my roster resources. Here's what I may have come up with:

It appears that three digit numbers first began arriving on the St.L&SF on the new engines being purchased beginning in 1886. This could possibly make the renumbering transistion period beginning in 1886 and continuing with new purchases. After 1886, as older 2-digit engines were shopped, they likely got repainted/renumbered with their new 3-digit numbers. To get all of the older St.L&SF 2-digit engines renumbered could take a few years, but was likely pretty much complete by 1890 or so.

What do you think?

Andre